How Does Group Togetherness Affect its Performance, and Does it Occur in All Stages of a Group’s Life Cycle?

Although organizations recognize the importance of groups and their abilities to perform tasks together, the effectiveness of a group first begins with the individual and the formation of group togetherness.  The interaction between group members has a bearing on the exchange of information, the formation of coalitions, and the response to group leaders.  Linking group members together to form a unique bond with each other, and the group as a whole may or may not develop simultaneously.  In fact, Tuckman (well known for developing the standard for defining a group’s life cycle) argued that groups needed to experience a series of stages before the group reached a level of maturity that enabled group performance to exist.  His original research labeled the stages of a group’s life cycle as: a) forming, b) storming, c) norming, and d) performing.  His view, not supported by all theorists, contradicted the claim in which effective task performance might be attained at other points within a group’s life cycle and not just in the performing stage.

Group Togetherness or Cohesion

The bonds that link group members to one another and to their group as a whole are not believed to develop spontaneously.  Over the years, social scientists have explained the phenomenon of group cohesiveness in different ways.  From this viewpoint, understanding how the individual behaves within the group is important to determining how well the group works together.

Individuals attracted to other employees within a group create the foundation of forming group cohesiveness.  In other words, group togetherness exists when members have mutual, positive feelings towards one another. This deep sense of belonging emerges from individual’s recognizing similarities and differences then aligns with those of similar values and work ethics.   When individuals within a group work on collective tasks or goals, they assert interdependence and possess feelings of responsibility for the outcomes of the group as a whole.  Within the context of these dynamics, a bond of unity forms connecting the achievement of goals to group cohesion or togetherness.

Group Performance

High quality productive relationships are a key determinant in the performance of cognitively diverse groups.  There are five specific areas of consideration when determining a group’s performance such as: a) the group performs its work tasks well, b)
the group completes its work tasks on time, c) there
 is a high level of satisfaction with the way the group functions, d) the
 group contributes significantly to the whole organization, and e)
the group produces a high quality of products/services.  These multiple dependent measures are important to evaluating group performance and in some way relate to one another.

Tuckman’s Stages of a Group’s Life Cycle

Taking what is known of group cohesion and its affect on group performance, there are several assertions, which logically can be concluded for each stage of a group’s life cycle.

The forming stage begins the development of the group and is the time when group members learn about each other and the task(s) at hand.  Observable or quantifiable indicators of this stage may include, but not limited to, unclear objectives, non-committed involvement, confusion, low morale, hidden feelings, and poor listening.  Members during this stage will assess group performance based on tasks, social behaviors, and norms within the group.  It is possible that members will determine the resources needed due to limitations and boundaries of the task that are identified.  With the newly formed group, the ability for individual group members to assess attraction, to develop task commitment, or to have a sense of belonging is expected to be low.

As group members continue to interact, they will engage in discussions about group structure and power in a storming stage.  Often during this stage, conflict arises due to the emotional connection individuals have regarding status in the group.  Some of the defining attributes of this stage of group development includes, but not limited to, subjectivity, hidden agenda, conflicts, confrontation, volatility, resentment, anger, inconsistency, and failure.  It is in this stage that individuals tend to express emotional responses to one another.

Goal attainment provides the purpose for the norming stage, whether implicit or explicitly stated.  Group members identify and agree upon the structure for healthy and productive communication as related to group performance.  Some of the characteristics of this stage include, but not limited to, reviewing and clarifying objectives, changing and confirming roles, assertiveness, listening, testing boundaries of engagement, identifying strengths and weaknesses.  Through this process, individuals work as an entity, develop productive group feelings towards each other, and work to extend the life of the group.  This level of group development required individuals to exhibit trust and a willingness to cooperate.  As interpersonal relationships are developed, new norms are established, which in turn strengthens group cohesion.  Moreover, because group members work through conflicts that occurred in the storming stage, they showed high levels of trust to other members, commitment to the group, and willingness to cooperate. Furthermore, norms developed in this stage facilitate the development of interpersonal relationships, which in turn enhances group cohesiveness, openness, and information exchange. 

Finally, the performing stage, or final stage is characteristic of group members showing flexibility and adaptive tendencies in terms of roles and functions.  With this stage, groups reach a conclusion and implement a solution, or complete the task(s) assigned.  As the group has resolved many high profile relational issues, there exists a high expectancy of group productivity and accomplishment.  Often task accomplishment, seen as part of the performing stage, elicited more effort from some group members than others.

Putting it all together

It is incumbent upon leaders to understand the impact of group togetherness and how this cohesion impacts group performance.  There is value attained for the leader, employee and organization’s benefits when the leader leverages this phenomenon during all stages of a group’s life cycle.  When leaders miss out on this opportunity, they shortchange the employee’s ability to perform at a high level and to receive the recognition of that accomplishment.  The organization as well suffers because productivity is negatively impacted from missed opportunities.  Today’s leaders should not underestimate the value of group cohesion to work together in getting the job done.  In fact, it may be wise for leaders to underscore its importance through actions that foster team togetherness relying on key attributes such as positive attitude, teamwork, professionalism and accountability.